Timothy Kim Annotation #4 10/14/2011 The Corporation Word Count: 2054
The Corporation was directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott released in 2003.
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This documentary examines “the nature, evolution, impacts, and possible futures of the modern business corporation. Through the voices of CEOs, whistle blowers, brokers, gurus and spies, insiders and outsiders, the film narrates the corporation as a paradox, an institution, which creates great wealth, but causes enormous, and often hidden harms.”1
How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
The arguments and points that film addressed were very clear and highly credible since they interviewed very diverse group of experts to collect a wide range of opinions. Although there isn’t much number and scientific data, the film consists of many political and social scientific data. All scholars interviewed in this film are one of the most well-known figures in each field. They also showed different types of CEOs to address different points of view effectively. Numerous testimonies by whistle blowers, brokers, and traders were helpful to understand the scope of the corporate organizations and operations. The film didn’t appeal emotionally and presented the arguments professionally and in a well-balanced manner.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out? Legal
The origin of the corporation changed a lot after Civil War and Industrial Revolution, especially, corporate lawyers used the 14th amendment to gain more rights by arguing that the corporation should have rights as a person. Behavioral and Cultural
Corporations are “special kinds of person, which are designed by law, to be concerned only for their stockholders.” In fact, the corporation is legally bound to put its bottom line ahead of everything else, even the public good. Corporations are “concerned only for the short-term profit of their stockholders who are very highly concentrated.”2 According to Richard Grossman, a Co-founder of Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy, “corporations don’t advertise products particularly; they’re advertising a way of life; A way of thinking; A story of who we are as people and how we got here and what’s the source of our so-called liberty, and so-called freedom.”3 Ecological and Technological
According to Jeremy Rifkin, Founder and President of the Foundation On Economic Trends, the Chakrabarty case is one of the great judicial moments in world history. General Electric and Professor Chakrabarty went to the patent office with a little microbe that eats up oil spills. They said they had modified this microbe in the laboratory, and therefore it was an invention. The patent office was very clear that you can’t patent life since allowing the patent on this microbe means that without any congressional guidance or public discussion, the corporations will own the blueprints of life. Seven years later the U.S. Patent office issued a one-sentence decree you can patent anything in the world that’s alive, except a full-birth human being. He continues to argue that “if this goes unchallenged in the world community within less than 10 years a handful of global companies will own directly, or though license, those actual genes that make up the evolution of our species. And they’re now beginning to patent the genomes of every other creature on this planet.” 4 Organizational and Political
Power struggle between the corporations and government are commented by Ira Jackson, Director of Center for Business and Government, Kennedy School, Harvard, and Sam Gibara, former CEO Goodyear Tire. According to Ira Jackson, “capitalism today commands the towering heights, and has displaced politics and politicians as the new high priests, and reigning oligarchs of our system. So capitalism and its principle protagonists and players, corporate CEOs, have been accorded unusual power and access. This is not to deny the significance of government and politicians but these are the new high priests.”5 According to Sam Gibara, “government lost the control over the corporations the power that they had since corporations went global. Government has become powerless. Compared to what they were before.”6 Media and Informational and Educational
The film has a whole section dedicates to the corporations’ influence on media by interviewing Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, two investigative reporters fired by Fox News after they refused to change a story on rBGH hormone that was injected into cows. The film also exposes how the corporations strategically shape young kids through advertisements to influence their future customers. The story of corporate sponsored university students was shown as an example.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I was most persuaded and compelled by the idea of privatization. Actually, I was very upset about the corporations challenge the common entities and steal them from us. I liked following quotations from the film the most. The wealth is only created when it’s owned privately. What would you call clean water, fresh air, a safe environment? Are they not a form of wealth? And why does it only become wealth when some entity puts a fence around it and declares it private property? Well, you know, that’s not wealth creation. That’s wealth usurpation.7 Elaine Bernard – Executive Director, Trade Union Program, Harvard Privatization does not mean you take a public institution and give it to some nice person. It means you take a public institution and give it to an unaccountable tyranny. Public institutions have many side benefits. For one thing they may purposely run at a loss. They’re not out for profit. They may purposely run at a loss because of the side benefits.8 Noam Chomsky – Institute Professor, MIT
I understand the argument that government failed to protect the common goods and the corporations took advantage of them. However, when I heard the concept of externalities, I couldn’t believe how the corporations trick the government and cheat the system to maximize profits. According to Ray Anderson, CEO of Interface, he explains where externalities come from “that notion of let somebody else deals with that. The pressure is on to the corporation to deliver results now and to externalize any cost that this unwary or uncaring public will allow it to eternalize.”9 The corporations create all these problems and pass their responsibilities to governments and others.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
Labeling the corporation as psychopaths wasn’t necessary. Although it was interesting to see the study of Dr. Robert Hare, Ph.D, Consultant to the FBI on Psychopaths, it was redundant. The film went through the characteristics that define this particular disorder, one by one, and see how they might apply to corporations.10
Personality Diagnostic Checklist – World Health Organization ICD-10
Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV
Callous unconcern for the feelings of others
Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships
Reckless disregard for the safety of others
Deceitfulness: repeated lying and conning others for profit
Incapacity to experience guilt
Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviours Diagnosis of Personality Disorder: Psychopath
As you can see above, the list is interesting but not compelling.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The film best addresses to every non-corporation people and environmentalist. In addition, it best addresses workers who were harmed by the corporations through layoffs, union busting, factory fires, sweatshops, and more. It also appeal to any people who are expose to dangerous products, toxic waste, pollution, and synthetic chemicals those were generated by the corporations. Any animal lovers may find this film disturbing since the corporations harm the animals by habitat destruction, factory farming, experimentation, and hormones, like rBGH/rGST/Posilac.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The corporation’s marketing strategies and how they are persuading young children could develop further. I understand the film tries to make connection by introducing corporate sponsored University students who could be an example of production of the consumerism culture. I think this study and arguments can extend to adult and high school students. Consumerism in general is a very wide topic but the film didn’t discuss it in detail. It is evident that as a consumer, we are helping the corporations. This relationship can be analyzed and diagnosed in many different ways. Showing how an individual can make a difference as a consumer, it may show how powerful or powerless people are against the corporations.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective actions, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The banner that has an image of the US flag with corporations’ logos as stars with title “Declare Independence from Corporate Rule” appeared several times in this movie. The film did a great job telling people how the corporations are impacting our daily lives and challenging people to be independent from the corporations.
Personally I liked what Michael Moore has to say about the film at the end. He stresses that people who watched this film must take action. Following is his quotation with some keywords in bold that I felt that is very vital. The curse for me has been the fact that in making these, you know documentary films, I’ve seen that they actually can impact change, so I’m just compelled to just keep making them. You know, I’ve always thought it’s very ironic that I’m able to do all this and yet what am I on? I’m on networks. I’m distributed by studios that are owned by large corporate entities. Now, why would they put me out there when I am opposed to everything that they stand for? And I spend my time on their dime opposing what they believe in. Okay? Well, it’s because they don’t believe in anything. They put me on there because they know that there’s millions of people that want to see my film or watch the TV show, and so they’re going to make money. And I’ve been able to get my stuff out there because I’m driving my truck through this incredible flaw in capitalism, the greed flaw. The thing that says the rich man will sell you the rope to hang himself with if he thinks he can make a buck off it, well, I’m the rope. I hope. I’m part of the rope. And they also believe that when people watch my stuff, or maybe watch this film, or whatever, they think that, you know, well, you know, well, you know what, they’ll watch this and they won’t do anything because we’ve done such a good job of numbing their minds and dumbing them down, you know, they’ll never affect… People aren’t going to leave the couch and go and do something political. They’re convinced of that. I’m convinced of the opposite. I’m convinced that a few people are going to leave this movie theatre or get up off the couch and go and do something, anything, and get this world back in our hands.11
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
I watched Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room that was directed by Alex Gibney and released in 2005. I was trying to seek for a specific example of how the corporation can fall apart when they are in the greed flaw. The film clearly shows that how the corporations play and influence the government, media, and even Wall Street to maximize their profits. They worked with bankers, “Useful Idiots”, who took share of the money and didn’t take responsibility. The conversation of two traders, who worked for Enron and made half-billion from the California crisis, revealed their unethical behavior and thoughts when they cheered for the wild fire in California. The film illustrated the case as a reflection of the CEO’s and the President’s greed that kept creating an illusion bubble to maintain their high stock values. This idea of a bubble is also showed in Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps that was directed by Oliver Stone and released in 2010. This Hollywood film also criticizes the flaw in the system and how people unethically behaved. In last decade, there were many media resources criticizing the capitalism and questioning the system. People are more aware of the system noticing the problems. This led to many movements like Occupy Wall Street. I personally feel like it’s going to be a turning point in history.
Notes I watched the DVD and continuously paused the movie to write down any quotations that caught my attention. I do not have exact minutes when the quotation was narrated or mentioned in the movie. Some quotation may not have name of author. 1. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Narrator) 2. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Noam Chomsky) 3. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Richard Grossman) 4. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Jeremy Rifkin) 5. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Ira Jackson) 6. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Sam Gibara) 7. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Elaine Bernard) 8. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Noam Chomsky) 9. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Ray Anderson) 10. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Dr. Robert Hare) 11. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Michael Moore)
The Corporation
Word Count: 2054
The Corporation was directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott released in 2003.
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This documentary examines “the nature, evolution, impacts, and possible futures of the modern business corporation. Through the voices of CEOs, whistle blowers, brokers, gurus and spies, insiders and outsiders, the film narrates the corporation as a paradox, an institution, which creates great wealth, but causes enormous, and often hidden harms.”1
How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
The arguments and points that film addressed were very clear and highly credible since they interviewed very diverse group of experts to collect a wide range of opinions. Although there isn’t much number and scientific data, the film consists of many political and social scientific data. All scholars interviewed in this film are one of the most well-known figures in each field. They also showed different types of CEOs to address different points of view effectively. Numerous testimonies by whistle blowers, brokers, and traders were helpful to understand the scope of the corporate organizations and operations. The film didn’t appeal emotionally and presented the arguments professionally and in a well-balanced manner.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Legal
The origin of the corporation changed a lot after Civil War and Industrial Revolution, especially, corporate lawyers used the 14th amendment to gain more rights by arguing that the corporation should have rights as a person.
Behavioral and Cultural
Corporations are “special kinds of person, which are designed by law, to be concerned only for their stockholders.” In fact, the corporation is legally bound to put its bottom line ahead of everything else, even the public good. Corporations are “concerned only for the short-term profit of their stockholders who are very highly concentrated.”2 According to Richard Grossman, a Co-founder of Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy, “corporations don’t advertise products particularly; they’re advertising a way of life; A way of thinking; A story of who we are as people and how we got here and what’s the source of our so-called liberty, and so-called freedom.”3
Ecological and Technological
According to Jeremy Rifkin, Founder and President of the Foundation On Economic Trends, the Chakrabarty case is one of the great judicial moments in world history. General Electric and Professor Chakrabarty went to the patent office with a little microbe that eats up oil spills. They said they had modified this microbe in the laboratory, and therefore it was an invention. The patent office was very clear that you can’t patent life since allowing the patent on this microbe means that without any congressional guidance or public discussion, the corporations will own the blueprints of life. Seven years later the U.S. Patent office issued a one-sentence decree you can patent anything in the world that’s alive, except a full-birth human being. He continues to argue that “if this goes unchallenged in the world community within less than 10 years a handful of global companies will own directly, or though license, those actual genes that make up the evolution of our species. And they’re now beginning to patent the genomes of every other creature on this planet.” 4
Organizational and Political
Power struggle between the corporations and government are commented by Ira Jackson, Director of Center for Business and Government, Kennedy School, Harvard, and Sam Gibara, former CEO Goodyear Tire. According to Ira Jackson, “capitalism today commands the towering heights, and has displaced politics and politicians as the new high priests, and reigning oligarchs of our system. So capitalism and its principle protagonists and players, corporate CEOs, have been accorded unusual power and access. This is not to deny the significance of government and politicians but these are the new high priests.”5 According to Sam Gibara, “government lost the control over the corporations the power that they had since corporations went global. Government has become powerless. Compared to what they were before.”6
Media and Informational and Educational
The film has a whole section dedicates to the corporations’ influence on media by interviewing Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, two investigative reporters fired by Fox News after they refused to change a story on rBGH hormone that was injected into cows. The film also exposes how the corporations strategically shape young kids through advertisements to influence their future customers. The story of corporate sponsored university students was shown as an example.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I was most persuaded and compelled by the idea of privatization. Actually, I was very upset about the corporations challenge the common entities and steal them from us. I liked following quotations from the film the most.
The wealth is only created when it’s owned privately. What would you call clean water, fresh air, a safe environment? Are they not a form of wealth? And why does it only become wealth when some entity puts a fence around it and declares it private property? Well, you know, that’s not wealth creation. That’s wealth usurpation.7
Elaine Bernard – Executive Director, Trade Union Program, Harvard
Privatization does not mean you take a public institution and give it to some nice person. It means you take a public institution and give it to an unaccountable tyranny. Public institutions have many side benefits. For one thing they may purposely run at a loss. They’re not out for profit. They may purposely run at a loss because of the side benefits.8
Noam Chomsky – Institute Professor, MIT
I understand the argument that government failed to protect the common goods and the corporations took advantage of them. However, when I heard the concept of externalities, I couldn’t believe how the corporations trick the government and cheat the system to maximize profits. According to Ray Anderson, CEO of Interface, he explains where externalities come from “that notion of let somebody else deals with that. The pressure is on to the corporation to deliver results now and to externalize any cost that this unwary or uncaring public will allow it to eternalize.”9 The corporations create all these problems and pass their responsibilities to governments and others.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
Labeling the corporation as psychopaths wasn’t necessary. Although it was interesting to see the study of Dr. Robert Hare, Ph.D, Consultant to the FBI on Psychopaths, it was redundant. The film went through the characteristics that define this particular disorder, one by one, and see how they might apply to corporations.10
Personality Diagnostic Checklist – World Health Organization ICD-10
Manual of Mental Disorders DSM-IV
Callous unconcern for the feelings of others
Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships
Reckless disregard for the safety of others
Deceitfulness: repeated lying and conning others for profit
Incapacity to experience guilt
Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviours
Diagnosis of Personality Disorder: Psychopath
As you can see above, the list is interesting but not compelling.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The film best addresses to every non-corporation people and environmentalist. In addition, it best addresses workers who were harmed by the corporations through layoffs, union busting, factory fires, sweatshops, and more. It also appeal to any people who are expose to dangerous products, toxic waste, pollution, and synthetic chemicals those were generated by the corporations. Any animal lovers may find this film disturbing since the corporations harm the animals by habitat destruction, factory farming, experimentation, and hormones, like rBGH/rGST/Posilac.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The corporation’s marketing strategies and how they are persuading young children could develop further. I understand the film tries to make connection by introducing corporate sponsored University students who could be an example of production of the consumerism culture. I think this study and arguments can extend to adult and high school students. Consumerism in general is a very wide topic but the film didn’t discuss it in detail. It is evident that as a consumer, we are helping the corporations. This relationship can be analyzed and diagnosed in many different ways. Showing how an individual can make a difference as a consumer, it may show how powerful or powerless people are against the corporations.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective actions, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The banner that has an image of the US flag with corporations’ logos as stars with title “Declare Independence from Corporate Rule” appeared several times in this movie. The film did a great job telling people how the corporations are impacting our daily lives and challenging people to be independent from the corporations.
Personally I liked what Michael Moore has to say about the film at the end. He stresses that people who watched this film must take action. Following is his quotation with some keywords in bold that I felt that is very vital.
The curse for me has been the fact that in making these, you know documentary films, I’ve seen that they actually can impact change, so I’m just compelled to just keep making them.
You know, I’ve always thought it’s very ironic that I’m able to do all this and yet what am I on? I’m on networks. I’m distributed by studios that are owned by large corporate entities. Now, why would they put me out there when I am opposed to everything that they stand for? And I spend my time on their dime opposing what they believe in. Okay? Well, it’s because they don’t believe in anything. They put me on there because they know that there’s millions of people that want to see my film or watch the TV show, and so they’re going to make money. And I’ve been able to get my stuff out there because I’m driving my truck through this incredible flaw in capitalism, the greed flaw. The thing that says the rich man will sell you the rope to hang himself with if he thinks he can make a buck off it, well, I’m the rope. I hope. I’m part of the rope. And they also believe that when people watch my stuff, or maybe watch this film, or whatever, they think that, you know, well, you know, well, you know what, they’ll watch this and they won’t do anything because we’ve done such a good job of numbing their minds and dumbing them down, you know, they’ll never affect… People aren’t going to leave the couch and go and do something political. They’re convinced of that. I’m convinced of the opposite. I’m convinced that a few people are going to leave this movie theatre or get up off the couch and go and do something, anything, and get this world back in our hands.11
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
I watched Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room that was directed by Alex Gibney and released in 2005. I was trying to seek for a specific example of how the corporation can fall apart when they are in the greed flaw. The film clearly shows that how the corporations play and influence the government, media, and even Wall Street to maximize their profits. They worked with bankers, “Useful Idiots”, who took share of the money and didn’t take responsibility. The conversation of two traders, who worked for Enron and made half-billion from the California crisis, revealed their unethical behavior and thoughts when they cheered for the wild fire in California. The film illustrated the case as a reflection of the CEO’s and the President’s greed that kept creating an illusion bubble to maintain their high stock values. This idea of a bubble is also showed in Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps that was directed by Oliver Stone and released in 2010. This Hollywood film also criticizes the flaw in the system and how people unethically behaved. In last decade, there were many media resources criticizing the capitalism and questioning the system. People are more aware of the system noticing the problems. This led to many movements like Occupy Wall Street. I personally feel like it’s going to be a turning point in history.
Notes
I watched the DVD and continuously paused the movie to write down any quotations that caught my attention. I do not have exact minutes when the quotation was narrated or mentioned in the movie. Some quotation may not have name of author. 1. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Narrator)
2. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Noam Chomsky)
3. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Richard Grossman)
4. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Jeremy Rifkin)
5. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Ira Jackson)
6. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Sam Gibara)
7. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Elaine Bernard)
8. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Noam Chomsky)
9. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Ray Anderson)
10. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Dr. Robert Hare)
11. Achbar, Mark and Jennifer Abbott. The Corporation. Big Picture Media Corporation. 2003. (Michael Moore)